Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Man sentenced to de facto life sentence without parole will get new
sentencing hearing that factors in his maturity at the time

May 11, 2015

NEWARK - In a groundbreaking ruling in an American Civil
Liberties Union of New Jersey case, a New Jersey judge found that people
convicted of crimes as juveniles cannot be sentenced to de facto life
without the possibility of parole without carefully considering the role
their youth played in their crimes.

The case involved James
Comer, who was sentenced at age 17 to serve 75 years in prison, more
than 68 without parole. Essex County Superior Court Judge Thomas R. Vena
in a ruling Friday, May 8, concurred with the ACLU-NJ that because
Comer will be 86 years old when he first becomes eligible for a parole
hearing, he had effectively been serving a life sentence. As a result
of the ruling, Comer will be resentenced.

“The judge adopted the
Supreme Court’s axiomatic observation that children are not just
miniature adults. The unique nature of their brain chemistry requires
that they be treated differently than adults,” said ACLU-NJ Senior Staff
Attorney Alexander Shalom. “This ruling clearly affirms that before a
court can condemn a child to die in prison, it must consider the things
about youth that make these extreme sentences so ill-suited to
juveniles.”

The ACLU-NJ argued that a series of U.S. Supreme
Court decisions proscribed courts from sentencing minors to life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole, including de facto life
sentences. Consistent with these cases, Comer’s resentencing will take
into account the immaturity and impetuousness that accompanies youth;
his home environment at the time; the circumstances of the offense, the
deficiencies of young people in handling real-world functions, such as
dealing with attorneys or police officers; and the possibility of
Comer’s rehabilitation.

While the judge did not share the
interpretation that the Supreme Court’s rulings amounted to an absolute
rejection of life sentences of minors, the judge did rule that Comer’s
sentence was unconstitutional because the judge failed to factor in the
hallmark factors of youth involved in his crime.

“This ruling
gets New Jersey courts one step closer to the reality that it is
unconstitutional to sentence children to die in prison,” said Lawrence
S. Lustberg of Gibbons P.C., who along with Joseph A. Pace, also of
Gibbons P.C., represented Comer on behalf of the ACLU-NJ. “The question
isn’t whether Comer deserves to be released – the question is whether
Comer and other children charged with serious crimes deserve a
meaningful opportunity to obtain release as they mature.”

Mr.
Comer, now 31 years old, was sentenced in 2003 for his role in four
robberies and a felony murder as a juvenile, with no meaningful
consideration given to his youth at the time. Felony murder differs from
murder in that if a murder is committed during the commission of a
crime, everyone involved in that crime is deemed responsible for the
murder, even though they did not actually kill or intend to kill.
Although he was not the one who pulled the trigger, Comer received a
longer sentence than his two accomplices, one who was charged with the
actual killing and the other who was an adult.

The resentencing,
which has not yet been scheduled, will take place in Essex County. The
State plans to appeal Judge Vena’s decision. The decision is available
at:

About Me

We do not open attachments. Stop e-mailing them. Threats and abusive e-mail are not covered by any privacy rule. This isn't to the reporters at a certain paper (keep 'em coming, they are funny). This is for the likes of failed comics who think they can threaten via e-mails and then whine, "E-mails are supposed to be private." E-mail threats will be turned over to the FBI and they will be noted here with the names and anything I feel like quoting.
This also applies to anyone writing to complain about a friend of mine. That's not why the public account exists.